<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Harms and Company Consulting &#187; Research Ethics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://harmsandcompany.com/main/category/research-ethics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://harmsandcompany.com/main</link>
	<description>Western Canada grant writing consultant</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:22:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Economics of peer review at NSERC – a pernicious discussion</title>
		<link>http://harmsandcompany.com/main/2009/04/13/pernicious-economics/</link>
		<comments>http://harmsandcompany.com/main/2009/04/13/pernicious-economics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 21:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Harms</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Grant Applications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NSERC (grant applications)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web 2.0]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmsandcompany.com/main/?p=558</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After writing the post “Economics of peer review at NSERC”, I decided to email the author and direct his attention to the blog discussions on his paper. I was thrilled by Gordon’s rapid response and provision of the paper in question:
Gordon, R., &#038; Poulin, B. (2009). Cost of the NSERC Science Grant Peer Review System [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://harmsandcompany.com/main/2009/04/13/pernicious-economics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fraudulent science – Scott S. Reuben</title>
		<link>http://harmsandcompany.com/main/2009/03/16/fraudulent-science-%e2%80%93-scott-s-reuben/</link>
		<comments>http://harmsandcompany.com/main/2009/03/16/fraudulent-science-%e2%80%93-scott-s-reuben/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:13:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diane Harms</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://harmsandcompany.com/main/?p=438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is research fraud becoming more prevalent? Or are more people just paying attention? Last week, Dr. Scott S. Reuben, an anaesthesiologist at Baystate Medical Center in Massachusetts, admitted that he fabricated the data for his research on post-surgery pain management. Dr. Steve Schafer, editor-in-chief of Anesthesia &#038; Analgesia, was quoted in a New York Times [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://harmsandcompany.com/main/2009/03/16/fraudulent-science-%e2%80%93-scott-s-reuben/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

